The New Communist Man
In the pursuit of a communist society, many
Marxist-Leninist authors have written about the new kind of person that will
create this society. This new kind of human being will be in stark contrast to
the kind of person that existed under a capitalist system. Once these
capitalist chains are removed, mankind will soar to new heights. Leon Trotsky
boasted of this new man:
Man will make it his purpose to master his own
feelings, to raise his instincts to the heights of consciousness, to make them
transparent, to extend the wires of his will into hidden recesses, and thereby
to raise himself to a new plane, to create a higher social biologic type, or,
if you please, a superman. (Literature and Revolution. 1924)
Che Guevara, the Cuban
revolutionary, expressed this idea very succinctly, "To build communism it
is necessary, simultaneous with the new material foundations, to build the new
man and woman" (Socialism and Man in Cuba. 1965). This vision is sometimes
referred to as the "New Communist Man". This new man is usually
described as being of great virtue, work ethic, and comradery. This kind of man
is a higher, and more full version of the man that is oppressed under Feudalism
and Capitalism.
The process by which this Homo
Communist will come about is expressed by Trotsky as a sort of evolutionary
process, whereby one engages in a process of mastery over one's self to become
a higher form of being than that which existed before. After this process of
mastery is complete, the communist supermen will have truly emerged. Trotsky
says in the closing of "Literature and Revolution" that, "The
forms of life will become dynamically dramatic. The average human type will
rise to the heights of an Aristotle, a Goethe, or a Marx. And above this ridge
new peaks will rise."
The results promised by Trotsky
have yet to arrive in Socialist countries, but this does not mean the idea has
been abandoned. Propaganda that existed in the Soviet Union, for example, is
filled with the ideas of a different kind of person for a different kind of
society. However, an important point must be emphasized. The rhetoric around
the "New Communist Man" always puts the catalyst for change inside
the individual. In other words, the new man will arise from within as soon as
Communism is established. However, is this really the case?
One need only to point to the
truly countless abuses of human rights committed by socialist and communist
countries. Control and coercion over economy, society, and life itself. Freedom
is extinct. Why did they feel such a need to exercise control and violence over
their citizens if the "New Comunist Man" had already arisen? This is
because the whole notion is ridiculous. No argument or reason was ever given as
to why man should suddenly be radically transformed under Communism. It was
simply assumed to be true by the Marxists. This is because there simply is no
reason. No communist man arose to fill the new communist society, so the mold
of the new man was imposed from above. There was a new society, and man was
forced into it.
The need for a new man is not a
concern faced by societies based on individual liberty and private property
rights, however. Liberty does not require that man be or do anything in order
for society to function. The societal order is created by the people that live
within it, based on their own values and principles. A bottom-up creation
allows for individuals to flourish, as there is no coercion forcing man to act
or behave in certain ways. Individuals come first. The society created is a
conscious result of those individuals.
A socialist society operates
opposite of a society based in freedom. The societal order is created from
above, with the values and principles from those above, and imposed on those
below. Man is to fit within this society. If he does not, he must be changed. This
is the reason for impetus in the communist rhetoric. WIthout a change, their
view of society cannot operate.
This is why there will never be
rhetoric around a "New Capitalist Man" in the event of a shift
towards a free society. Individuals have the primacy, and a new man is a
concern only for those societies who do not recognize that fact. If the past
experiments in socialism are any indication, those societies fail to stand the
test of time. To create a societal order where man is free to flourish, it must
be a result of those who live within it.
The Marxist-Leninist approach
to society fails because it tries to create man. He must be changed in order to
create this new society. In order to create a new world, the pieces must be
reconstructed. The fact that man can and should be changed is simply taken for
granted. Trotsky and Guevara never asked if the "New Communist Man"
could be created. They assumed that as soon as man was freed from his
Capitalist chains, this evolution would occur automatically. If that was truly
the case, why were the genocides commited by socialist regimes necessary? Why
is force necessary at all if this is really true? Force imposes the societal
order, and force attempts to change man to fit inside of it.
In a twisted way, there is some
truth to the concept of the "New Communist Man". This new man is one
who is subjugated. He is forced into submission by those above him who would
seek to transform society. In a word, unfree. The "New Capitalist
Man" on the other hand, has his will subject to none but himself. While he
may not turn into a Aristotle, Gothe, or Marx, he is free to choose not to.
Comments
Post a Comment